Posted on 09/25/2006 7:41:31 AM PDT by DocFarmer
Bill Clinton's Terrorism Temper Tantrum Written by Doc Farmer Monday, September 25, 2006
Bill Clinton Gets Mad About Terrorism (Finally!)
We all get ticked off occasionally. It happens. We even lose our temper and chew people out from time to time. I understand that, and I'd wager that most people do. We get upset when we make mistakes -- usually with ourselves, although it is natural to get a bit honked off at the person(s) who point out our mistakes. Normally, we accept their criticism (if we're honest to ourselves) and learn to correct those mistakes and prevent them in the future. If our mistakes harm others, we usually apologize for those errors and do our best to try and fix that harm if possible. I think everyone expects folks to behave in a mature and honorable fashion, and for the most part folks live up to that expectation.
Unless your name is William Jefferson Clinton, that is.
Now, you may have heard that Slick Willie was interviewed on Fox News Sunday (that evil bastion of right-wing, neo-con, fascist Dubya-supporting boneheads) by Chris Wallace. Mr. Wallace, last I checked, was NONE of those things, but let's set that aside. Slick was there to talk about his "global initiative", which is a fancy term for "Slick Trek IV -- The Search For A Legacy". Chris Wallace had a list of questions, about half of which were about Clinton's work on Global Warming (which doesn't exist as a man-made entity), and Global Heath, and mitigating religious/racial conflicts, etc. Generic but worthwhile issues, except for that global warming crap (another excuse to blame America). Be that as it may, the Clinton Foundation was getting a bunch of "experts" together to talk about these issues. Not fix them, but talk about them. You know, kinda like the UN.
Mr. Wallace recognized, however, that his viewers had a lot of questions about that ABC miniseries that Clinton tried to scotch, The Path To 9/11, which was critical of his administration (and also the Bush administration, frankly) and the handling of Usama bin Laden. (As we all know, last week a Cheese-Eating-Surrender-Monkey newspaper stated that bin Laden was dead. Over the weekend, however, his condition was upgraded to "alive"). No sooner had Mr. Wallace gotten to the point of his question, Slick Willie got mad. I mean mad for a politician, anyway. He was defensive, he was sputtering answers, interrupting Wallace, and basically trying to sell Richard Clarke's book over and over again, as if that absolved him of all sins.
Clinton then went on to accuse Wallace of being a neo-con. I think anyone who knows Mr. Wallace (and his famous father) can rest assured that he is not ANY kind of rep/con/tair. However, Mr. Wallace does work for Fox News, and they do have a reputation of trying to be "fair and balanced" (which is anathema to lib/dem/soc/commies). Frankly, Fox News does a hell of a lot better at that than most other news organizations. Since Chris Wallace is doing his best to cover all points of current import, he asked the tough questions. And Clinton tried to rip him a new one for it.
For roughly ten full minutes, Clinton went into full diatribe mode. Accused everybody else of messing up. Blamed rep/con/tairs for not getting bin Laden in 8 months, while not mentioning that he himself didn't get him in 96 months. Said that bin Laden wasn't even on the radar screen, although he himself said in his presidency that bin Laden was. Blamed the military for not giving the go-ahead to retaliate for the USS Cole attacks, while apparently forgetting what the term "Commander In Chief" actually stands for.
Clinton was red-faced. Clinton was finger-pointing. Clinton was leaning forward in his chair toward Chris Wallace. Frankly, I half expected Clinton to throw a punch at one point.
Clinton was lying.
As usual.
Look, let's face facts here. Clinton screwed up on getting bin Laden prior to 9/11. So did Bush. That's a fair and honest assessment. Not a very flattering one, but it does have the benefit of being the truth. Nevertheless, Clinton lied about his efforts to get bin Laden in particular or terrorists in general. He did LESS in his presidency to reduce the risk of terrorism. He did LESS to respond to actual acts of terror against US citizens and US interests. He let bin Laden get out of the gun sights on three separate occasions. He even ADMITTED this, on audio tape, saying he didn't have legal authorization when he actually DID.
But all Clinton can do is blame everybody else. He cannot accept his own failure. He may have said he failed, but it is obvious that he cannot and does not accept that he had any FAULT. Therefore, he lashes out at a reporter, and incidentally at the American People, to indict everyone except himself.
If it weren't for the fact that he is a former President of the United States, such a sustained outburst would be viewed as almost humorous. In his case, though, Clinton just came across as pathetic, panicked, and furious at the wrong person. He should have taken responsibility for what he DIDN'T do on his watch. Instead, he has taken every opportunity to disrespect the current President for all the things he HAS done to fix the grievous errors that Clinton left in his administration's wake.
Clinton calls the Wallace's Fox interview and the ABC miniseries "a misinformation campaign." Well, that's also a lie. It's an information campaign. It's the truth. It goes beyond politics here, despite what Clinton may wish to pretend in his partisan-ladened mind.
Frankly, I have to wonder -- if Clinton acts this way now, just how did he act during his presidency? I think we all remember that "apology" he gave after he got caught committing perjury (and no, it wasn't all about sex -- it was all about judicial malfeasance on his part). He spent about 90 seconds apologizing and the rest of the time coming up with excuses and blaming everybody else. He skirted issues, obfuscated responsibility, and basically decided that it was just a political attack on him.
We all remember as well his famous "finger-wagging lie" when he was speaking about a former intern. He was wagging that finger again at Chris Wallace during his overly-defensive diatribe. One could infer that you know Clinton is lying when he wags his finger. Others claim that you know Clinton is lying when he moves his lips. Either way, it's hardly the type of behavior we should expect or tolerate from any high government official, current or former.
Clinton's narcissism is still amazing to watch. It's all about him. He actually said after 9/11 that he wished it had happened on his watch. Think about that. He was so concerned about his legacy, that he wished 3,000 innocent people could have been slaughtered so HE would look more "presidential."
Well, it very easily could have, considering his pathetic and weak-willed actions.
And now, all he can do when confronted with the truth is lose his temper, attack a reporter, and have a ten-minute on-air tantrum.
I think we've found his true legacy, folks.
About the Writer: Doc Farmer is a writer and humorist who is also a moderator on ChronWatch's Forum. He formerly lived in Saudi Arabia and Qatar, but now resides in the Midwest. Doc receives e-mail at docfarmer9999@yahoo.co.uk.
This Article Was First Published On ChronWatch At: http://www.chronwatch.com/content/contentDisplay.asp?aid=23907
He is Beelzeflubba. Nothing is too base for him and his minions..
Clinton behaved exactly like an alcoholic I knew very well. Angry eyes, jabbing finger, garrulousness, paranoia, resentment.
[... Clinton's need to defend his name is going
to benefit the Republicans in November...]
Clinton's Wallace interview offered enough fodder
to keep Republicans in office until the next
millenium.... IF ... they are willing to use these
sound bytes for their ad campaigns.
I hope there is enough here to keep Clinton from
being appointed head of the UN. Doh! What am I
thinking, he's the perfect kind of nut job for
the UN job.
You may be right about the "kiss of death". i think his tantrum was two-fold...Put the blame elsewhere and to say that FOX NEWS is Pro-Republican AND anti-Dem. Kinda like telling the citizens to turn off Fox.
"I'm sure this has already been noted on the thread, but I caught several slurs in Clinton's speech patterns. He may have been looped."
But I'm sure he won't be considered an idiot and a fool as would George W. Isn't it something how ALL (let me repeat: ALL) Republican presidents since before FDR have been considered to be stumbling, bumbling idiots: Eisenhower (stupid and played too much golf), Nixon (stupid and a crook), Ford (bumbling idiot), Reagan (and idiot actor), George Bush I (dumber than a rock with an even dumber VP), George W. (a moron and an idiot).
However, each and EVERY Democratic president was beyong reproach, brilliant, ready to hit the ground running.
And the lapdog press and comedians followed suit.
Clinton's wife ran around running the country. Clinton ran around with his pants around his ankles. What a sad period in our history. Can you imagine little kids (or anybody for that matter) having to learn about Lewinsky's servicing of the leader of our nation while our country became vulnerable. Preposterous!
Yes, Bush had an especially difficult transition period...thanks to the dems who obstructed, undermined his legitimacy ("President select Bush"), trashed the White House, trashed Ashcroft and others, etc.
Nah, but lying does. Like when I'd try that with my parents when I was growing up. (Dang thick tongue)....a dead giveaway!:)
Sounds more to me like he was whining about being put on the spot over his lack of action with terrorists. We know he had plenty of "action" with Monica. But if my wife were anything like the Hildabeast there's no telling what or who I might do.
Yes. A variation on the false argument that "Only stupid, unkind people watch FoxNews."
Maybe. Also could be an indication of an internal disorder -- liver, spleen or something.
Probably caught a buzz in the limo...
Clinton's entire presidency was a job interview for head of the UN-that is what his aim has always been. That is why he is sooooo defensive regarding his handling of terrorism and all things military. This casts a long shadow on his lack of a legacy.
Carolyn
I watched the replay of part of this "interview" w/Chris Wallace on U Tube. I have to say that I had a lot of sympathy for Mr. Wallace. I would not have liked to be facing Clinton while he railed at me making all the accusatory statements he did, i.e. "neocons", "right-wingers", etc. etc. Wow. What a class act Clinton is constantly proving himself to be (not). But hey, the Democrats LOVE him. LOVE HIM! He's their boy, FOREVER. Black Hawk Down? Nah, doesn't matter. It wasn't HIS fault. He had NOTHING to do with it. It was everybody ELSE. Disgusting.
I was thinking perhaps a speed freak. There were a lot of them from the sixties. Most of them burned out and died or got straight and lived. Perhaps a relapse. The stuff will really make you feel good regardless of what a piece of garbage you are. That is why they like it.
You have much more confidence in the American sheeple than I........
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.